A major takeaway from this script for me was the moral question. And I'm not referring to the abolition of slavery. Yes, abolition is the raging moral issue for the characters in the story. But for us in the audience, the question has been answered finally and for all time: slavery is an abominable evil. The moral question in the story that intrigues me is: does a noble cause justify using ignoble methods? Lincoln was a great national leader because he was also a shrewd politician. He was not naïve about how the system worked, how to get things done in Washington. It was then -- and is now -- an inconvenient truth that politics, governments operate with a split Dr. Jekyll-Mr. Hyde personality. There is the idealized, public Persona, Dr. Jekyll version -- how we want our government to work -- and in the background the Shadowy, Mr. Hyde version, how things sometimes, perhaps too often, actually work. In this story, Abraham Lincoln is on the side of God in fighting to abolish slavery, but he's not above employing the Devil to attain that goal. At first, he resorts to the standard m.o., subcontract it out to others, maintain his distance and plausible deniability. But eventually, he has to get personally involved. Looking at his involvement through the lens of Jungian psychology -- which I am partial to -- one might say that the dramatic situation compels Lincoln to engage his Shadow with the Shadow, the corruption, of the political system. To pass the 13th Amendment, he must do what a politician has to do to get things done: manipulate, cajole, compromise, even prevaricate. But here's my point: Although Lincoln must use Shadowy ways to get votes, he doesn't let the Shadow of the system or his own personality overwhelm and corrupt him. He gets his hands dirty, to be sure, but not his character. His fundamental moral integrity remains intact. He does not lose his soul in the process of winning the vote. A rare feat for a character in film -- and in real life.